Dawson v. Porch.com Inc

W.D. Washington

Dawson v. Porch.com Inc

DecidedFebruary 28, 2023

Docket2:20-cv-00604

StatusUnknown

This text of Dawson v. Porch.com Inc (Dawson v. Porch.com Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dawson v. Porch.com Inc, (W.D. Wash. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7

8 BOB DAWSON, et al., CASE NO. 2:20-cv-00604-RSL 9 Plaintiffs, v. 10 ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY AND ESTABLISHING BRIEFING 11 PORCH.COM INC., et al., SCHEDULE

12 Defendants. 13

14 This matter comes before the Court on the “Joint Status Report” submitted by the 15 parties. Dkt. # 90. Having reviewed the report and heard the arguments of counsel, the 16 Court finds as follows: 17 A stay of discovery while the legal issues related to the autodialer claims are 18 resolved is necessary to promote efficiency and avoid undue burden and expense. Fed. R. 19 Civ. P. 26(c). Defendants have identified “a real question” regarding the viability of 20 plaintiffs’ autodialer claims, and plaintiffs have not shown that they will be prejudiced if a 21 stay is ordered. Wood v. McEwen, 644 F.2d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 1981). 22 Defendants shall, within thirty days of the date of this Order, file their motion to 23 dismiss.1 The motion shall be noted for consideration by the Court on May 5, 2023. 24

25 26 1 Defendants shall include in their motion any defense or objection that is currently available to them. ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY AND ESTABLISHING 1 Dated this 28th day of February, 2023.

2 3 Robert S. Lasnik 4 United States District Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY AND ESTABLISHING

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 7

8 BOB DAWSON, et al., CASE NO. 2:20-cv-00604-RSL 9 Plaintiffs, v. 10 ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY AND ESTABLISHING BRIEFING 11 PORCH.COM INC., et al., SCHEDULE

12 Defendants. 13

14 This matter comes before the Court on the “Joint Status Report” submitted by the 15 parties. Dkt. # 90. Having reviewed the report and heard the arguments of counsel, the 16 Court finds as follows: 17 A stay of discovery while the legal issues related to the autodialer claims are 18 resolved is necessary to promote efficiency and avoid undue burden and expense. Fed. R. 19 Civ. P. 26(c). Defendants have identified “a real question” regarding the viability of 20 plaintiffs’ autodialer claims, and plaintiffs have not shown that they will be prejudiced if a 21 stay is ordered. Wood v. McEwen, 644 F.2d 797, 802 (9th Cir. 1981). 22 Defendants shall, within thirty days of the date of this Order, file their motion to 23 dismiss.1 The motion shall be noted for consideration by the Court on May 5, 2023. 24

25 26 1 Defendants shall include in their motion any defense or objection that is currently available to them. ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY AND ESTABLISHING 1 Dated this 28th day of February, 2023.

2 3 Robert S. Lasnik 4 United States District Judge 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ORDER STAYING DISCOVERY AND ESTABLISHING

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Dawson v. Porch.com Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dawson-v-porchcom-inc-wawd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack